Case Activity (1031)

1. Misc | Filed: September 17, 2026 | Entered: September 17, 2026 Amerisure Insurance Company et al v. Horus Construction Services, Inc. et al

   Insurance | Florida Middle

   Response to order to show cause

   RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 38 Order filed by Amerisure Insurance Company, Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company. (Scott, Latasha)

2. Order | Filed: September 17, 2026 | Entered: September 17, 2026 Amerisure Insurance Company et al v. Horus Construction Services, Inc. et al

   Insurance | Florida Middle

   Order on Motion to Dismiss

   ENDORSED ORDER: Horus Construction Services, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Declaration Regarding Plaintiffs' Duty to Indemnify (Doc. # 31) is granted in part and denied in part. Dismissal is unwarranted merely because the underlying action remains unresolved. See Sheriff of Broward County v. Evanston Insurance Co., 159 F.4th 792, 804 (11th Cir. 2025) (recognizing that a coverage dispute may present a justiciable controversy before entry of an underlying liability judgment). Exercising its discretion under the Declaratory Judgment Act, the Court stays the indemnity portions of Counts II and IV pending resolution of the underlying action because application of the exclusions may require factual determinations concerning Horus's role and activities that overlap with the underlying action. See United Specialty Ins. Co. v. Tzadik Acquisitions, LLC, No. 3:18-cv-1465-TJC-JBT, 2019 WL 5110836, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 12, 2019) (staying indemnity determinations while permitting proceedings concerning the duty to defend). The Court declines at this stage to stay the indemnity portions of Counts I and III because the alleged notice and cooperation breaches present distinct policy-compliance questions that also bear on the ongoing duty-to-defend claims and that do not appear to depend on the facts established in the underlying action. See Higgins v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 894 So. 2d 5, 10 n.2, 18 (Fla. 2004) (recognizing declaratory adjudication of notice and cooperation facts affecting defense obligations and approving adjudication of indemnity coverage before the underlying tort action was resolved); James River Insurance Co. v. Rich Bon Corp., 34 F.4th 1054, 1061-62 (11th Cir. 2022) (requiring consideration of both overlapping and distinct coverage claims, including the efficiency benefits of resolving issues unique to the declaratory action). The duty-to-defend portions of all claims shall proceed, and the stay as to the indemnity portions of Counts II and IV may be lifted earlier if a coverage ruling about the duty to defend necessarily resolves the corresponding indemnity issue. The parties shall file a joint status report within three days after resolution of the underlying action. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 9/17/2026. (DMD)

3. 1029 additional result(s)